If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
nospam wrote:
You may want to re-think your concept of "physical security" since we're talking about /radio/ waves, where it's impossible to have physical security of what transpires over those radio waves. nearly all data on a smartphone is encrypted *if* it's sent over the air. quite a bit of data never leaves the phone. ever. Let's give up because you have no concept of even the simplest of things about meta data and where you can only spout exactly what Brand X marketing has told you to spout. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
nospam wrote:
not using modern encryption techniques, they didn't. You think an adversary is going to go frontal (which is /exactly/ what Brand X marketing has fed you), when there are /plenty/ of weak links by side channels. I'm not ever saying that encryption isn't a good thing (as it makes frontal attacks more expensive); what I'm saying is the obvious fact that /all/ consumer grade mobile phones suffer from the same set of weakest links. So, even as Brand X marketing makes its admittedly gullible and very loyal and trusting customer base /feel/ safe, they're actually /not/ safe, just as the little boy feels safe when his mom tells him that closing the closet door will keep the monsters out. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
In article , ultred
ragnusen wrote: not using modern encryption techniques, they didn't. You think an adversary is going to go frontal (which is /exactly/ what Brand X marketing has fed you), when there are /plenty/ of weak links by side channels. on android, yes. on ios, no. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
Barry Margolin:
Security isn't binary, it's a continuum. No one is completely safe, but if there's less information on your phone, the danger from the government cracking it is lower. And if the phone has better encryption, then you're more safe. This conversation entirely misses the point. As I have pointed out, the "threat" does not come from the US government, which is utterly uninterested in what you do on-line. Amazon, Facebook, Google, and myriad other commercial enterprises, on the other hand, are very much interested in what you are doing on-line and they have the means of tracking you. Got a medical condition and using the Internet to learn more about it? Noted. Interested in buying a car? Noted. Traveling? Location and dates noted.* In fact, anything and everything that could conceivably enable a commercial enterprise make a few pennies from your personal information is noted. But it's not on a list under your name that someone prints out and has fun reading; printer paper is not sold in 1000km rolls. The data is in a virtually instantaneous computer-to-computer transaction in which an intermediary enables targeted ads on your Internet-connected devices. A few days ago I googled air fares to London. Within *seconds* web pages that I visited were peppered with ads for airlines, rental cars, and hotels. *Travel: if you have an E-ZPass or equivalent the issuer knows every time you go through a toll booth. For that matter, authorities know when you go through a toll booth even if you choose to use a slow lane; your license plate is read by a camera. How it is that the paranoids ignore commercial trackers and worry about a disinterested government, I do not know. But then, I'm not paranoid. -- I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that you will say in your entire life. usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
ultred ragnusen:
My last related job was decades ago running a series of FFT algorithms on aerial photos in order to recognize specifically shaped man-made objects, but I admit that was decades ago at Fort Mead. If you can't even spell "Ft. Meade" I am suspicious of your claim that you worked there. -- I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that you will say in your entire life. usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
JF Mezei wrote:
NSA has widespread data collections that do collect anyone's communications, they just can't "target" a USA citizen (aka: do a search through the trove of data for a US citizens comms without FISA). Bear in mind the hair triggers that are used in various go'bment organizations to /begin/ that targeting, from merely visiting the Tails site to merely making a phone call overseas, to merely depositing or merely withdrawing more than 10K in cash at your local bank. This isn't a case of the government monitoring ME. It is a case of them collecting my communications in bulk, and when doing searches for something unreleated, my stuff might come up. Exactly. Those ubiquitous FBI Cessnas, for example, are collecting bulk data, which shows that Lewis' IMEI, for example, was at his boyfriend BKatOnRamp's house whose IMEI itself was at the AIDS clinic where they met with Jolly Roger's IMEI for a tete e' tete. If I make a joke about centrifuges in my basement to make a nuclear device, and this is collected, then someone doing a search for terrorists in USA planning to detonate nuke would pull up my joke. It is then up to an analyst to determine this is of no value and dismiss it. Yup. They have /direct/ taps into all the major Internet trunks, where they vacuum up /everything/ they can, with their massive data servers. Then they sift, sift, sift.... Never forget something as simple as the Zimmermmann telegram, or the German Enigma, or JN24, or Rommel's bigmouth in Cairo, etc., where you realize even extremely well funded and tremendously well motivated organizations are summarily penetrated (in the Cairo case, simply by opening up a safe in his office when the American diplomat was sleeping at his hotel). |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
Davoud wrote:
If you can't even spell "Ft. Meade" I am suspicious of your claim that you worked there. See my prior response to nospam on that... |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
nospam wrote:
not using modern encryption techniques, they didn't. You think an adversary is going to go frontal (which is /exactly/ what Brand X marketing has fed you), when there are /plenty/ of weak links by side channels. on android, yes. on ios, no. I make these valid and logical points, both of which you exhibit, as do hundreds of millions of innocents... 1. Apple marketing /wants/ you to think your adversary will go frontal with an insanely expensive brute-force attack - which is what makes you /feel/ safe - but which isn't how they'll go since there are /plenty/ of weak links in /all/ consumer-grade mobile phones. 2. You think, because of the above, that brand X phones are, somehow, magically, immune to all those weak links, which is a pacifying fiction that is what I term your belief system built upon a house of cards. 3. Even with the above, /all/ existing ciphers have been or will be broken (but we won't know this until 50 years after the fact, just as we didn't know that Roosevelt knew that Japan was making peace overtures to Stalin not only months before, but as close as the day before the Russians attacked and our allies, the Russians, never bothered to tell us this salient fact). These are merely logical outcomes of valid verified facts. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
Davoud wrote:
This conversation entirely misses the point. As I have pointed out, the "threat" does not come from the US government, which is utterly uninterested in what you do on-line. You bring up a valid point, which is that the US Government is probably one of the minor threats we US citizens face - but it's one whom we /pay/ hard-earned dollars to /protect/ us, where they take the easy way out by surveiling us instead. Amazon, Facebook, Google, and myriad other commercial enterprises, on the other hand, are very much interested in what you are doing on-line and they have the means of tracking you. True that. Again, the weak link in /all/ consumer mobile devices is the same in this case in that Amazon isn't ever going to go frontal with a brute-force attack on nospam's vaunted encryption algorithm, which forms the imaginary basis of his entire belief system. Got a medical condition and using the Internet to learn more about it? Noted. Interested in buying a car? Noted. Traveling? Location and dates noted.* In fact, anything and everything that could conceivably enable a commercial enterprise make a few pennies from your personal information is noted. True dat. Everything is tied together by the commercial aggregators, such that the metadata /is/ the data, where, again, I simply posit that, despite the brand X marketing mantra that nospam loves to spew, /all/ consumer-grade mobile devices suffer from the same set of weak links. But it's not on a list under your name that someone prints out and has fun reading; printer paper is not sold in 1000km rolls. The data is in a virtually instantaneous computer-to-computer transaction in which an intermediary enables targeted ads on your Internet-connected devices. True that. And, worse, the data is /stored/ somewhere, where it makes a juicy cache for someone /else/ to steal. As I recall, even your debug logs to Microsoft were being intercepted and stored, and sifted through for data such as your Ethernet MAC address (I'd have to look that one up). Hence, I posit, the weak link in /all/ consumer-grade computing devices is the same, despite brand X's admittedly obvious attempt to make it's loyal but extremely gullible customers believe that a frontal brute-force attack is the main danger. A few days ago I googled air fares to London. Within *seconds* web pages that I visited were peppered with ads for airlines, rental cars, and hotels. True that. The solution is difficult but it's like the solution to the most common cause of brake judder - which isn't to change the hardware or software, but to change your browsing habits (e.g., VPN, proxy, nyms, headers, etc.). *Travel: if you have an E-ZPass or equivalent the issuer knows every time you go through a toll booth. For that matter, authorities know when you go through a toll booth even if you choose to use a slow lane; your license plate is read by a camera. Yup. I once got a ticket for being in a lane on i580 near Livermore that I didn't even know was a toll lane, as the highway must be 8 lanes wide on each side at that point, so I was just cruising along with no traffic visible in the photo at a non-commute time. The ticket was based merely off my license plate since there's no way I'd ever have those electronic payment systems in my vehicle. (I wonder, if you have one, can you easily turn it off? Or do you have to Faraday it?) How it is that the paranoids ignore commercial trackers and worry about a disinterested government, I do not know. But then, I'm not paranoid. I'm not sure whom you're speaking about, but I agree with all your sentiments, where you have to remember almost all the responses from me were regarding nospam's marketing-inspired allegation that Brand X phones are safer simply because of the expense of the frontal attack, which would only realistically be done by a gobment organization. Outside of nospam's obvious blind allegiance to Brand X marketing mantra, you'll see me exhibit the same sentiment you do, which is that the threat is from a wealth of well-funded sources, such that no phone line is any safer than any other. All you can do to combat this threat is constant "privacy hygiene", such as changing IP addresses, changing nyms and email addresses, changing IMEI numbers, changing locations, providing false data, changing your vernacular, etc. Privacy is expensive. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone Model In Existence
In article , ultred
ragnusen wrote: changing IMEI numbers, that's illegal. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
iPhone addicts cut-back on their children's food to afford latest iPhone | nospam | Digital Photography | 9 | August 31st 16 05:12 AM |
iphone crybaby sues Nikon (boo hoo! No iPhone support for D500 wifi!! | Mark Storkamp[_2_] | Digital Photography | 15 | June 25th 16 05:20 PM |
my application for iPhone: Model Pose | George Kerby | Digital Photography | 0 | November 12th 08 04:05 PM |
my application for iPhone: Model Pose | Folley Angstrom | Digital Photography | 0 | November 12th 08 07:53 AM |
The Existence of God | Happy Man | Digital Photography | 9 | March 1st 07 06:32 AM |